2. Contact Info

3. Dealer Selection

It’s every host’s worst nightmare. You fuss and fret to make everything perfect, redecorating inside and out, upgrading to the best, most powerful entertainment systems, and then…nobody comes. You can’t blame Ford for overpreparing. The ruffians that were expected to crash the Mustang’s perennial sales party looked tough — particularly the 500-plus-hp Camaro Z/28. Then the global economic buzz-kill hit Ford‘s competitors hard, kyboshing politically frivolous projects like gas-guzzling two-doors. Now Ford stands alone at the top of the pony/musclecar hill, but is this de-facto king of the hill worthy of his crown?

We Nancy-boy, string-back-glove sorts are quick to carp at cars carrying 58% of two tons on a strut-suspended nose with the rest on a live axle, but a spirited drive up California’s Highway 1 in Ford’s latest Shelby GT500 has us eating some preconceived carp. Despite its carryover architecture and heavy borrowing from last year’s GT500 KR, this 2010 Shelby’s steering feel, turn-in, and ride/handling balance are dramatically improved. The transformation is particularly impressive given the minimal tweaks made to the springs, dampers, and steering as 19-in. tires replaced 18s.

“The tires are the key,” says SVT vehicle dynamics specialist Eric Zinkosky, “they’re the foundation of all the chassis tuning.” Dedicated tires couldn’t be engineered for the rushed (six-month development) KR program, so they chose off-the-shelf R-spec Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercars capable of generating big track numbers. This program afforded time to engineer completely different front and rear tires. Their construction differs significantly (belts, belt angles, tread patterns) to produce differing response rates, and tuning the rate at which the rears deform under cornering forces was crucial to making the car turn in quickly and confidently. Tuning the tire, spring, and damper frequencies as a system also enhanced ride quality. Caveat, DUB enthusiasts.

When asked about other possible rear suspension solutions, Zinkosky opines that the Cobra’s independent multilink rear setup — which he helped develop — paid ride and refinement dividends but resulted in a car that was somewhat difficult to drive fast. And as for swapping the GT500’s low-tech Panhard rod for a fancier Watts linkage, he points to the challenges mounting that linkage to the differential cover involves regarding sealing the diff and points out that you end up with five bushings to control instead of two. The 43-in.-long Panhard rod that fits in the Shelby only results in just a few millimeters of sideways motion throughout the full range of suspension travel, and he claims this is the stiffest lateral location of any live axle suspension out there.

Other notable changes: Relative to the KR, the front springs are softer (but 13% firmer than the old GT500’s); rear springs are the same (7% stiffer than the GT500’s); Tokico dampers are similar and stiffer than GT500’s, but their response-rate curves are recontoured for better compliance; and the front anti-roll bar is softer to reduce understeer. The steering ratio is unchanged, but all Mustangs get a stiffer steering-column isolator and the Shelby’s intermediate shaft is 18% stiffer for improved road feel. The torsion bar that apportions power steering assist is totally redesigned to reduce the amount of steering input needed to turn the car (addressing a major complaint we had with the KR in our Best Handling test).

Party preparations in the drivetrain included adding knock sensors to the Ford GT-based, Eaton-supercharged 5.4L engine for the first time. This enabled more aggressive spark-advance timing to fatten the torque curve and improve throttle response, though peak output equals the KR’s: 540 hp and 510 lb-ft. Why didn’t SVT employ the latest Eaton four-lobe “Twin Vortices Series” blower? According to chief engineer Jamal Hameedi, the 1.9L TVS could have done the job perhaps a bit more efficiently than this 2.3L traditional (three-lobe rotor) design, but it would’ve cost more and wouldn’t have appealed to the loyal SVT fan base as much. These guys like to tune their cars and the bigger blower responds better to overspeed pulleys and the like. Shortening the axle ratio from 3.31:1 to 3.55:1 boosts acceleration performance while lengthening the top two ratios (by 17.5% in sixth) elevates highway fuel economy by 2 mpg, dropping the gas-guzzler tax by $300 (to $1000). A new, larger twin-disc clutch employs an intermediate plate that is retained by heavy-duty flexible metal “straps” instead of floating freely with a splined connection to the housing. This new setup cuts noise and pedal effort while increasing durability, and a way-cool cue ball tops a short-shift linkage that moves with a pleasing rifle-bolt mechanical action.

Inside and out, the 2010 Shelby GT500 feels more special than the outgoing model, from its unique front and rear appearance — optimized for ideal aerodynamic balance at speeds of 120 or more — to its dressier cabin with leather stripes stitched into the leather and Alcantara seats color-matched to the racing stripes on the outside. Those stripes, by the way, are manually applied off-line by some of the most highly skilled workers at Ford. How long does it take? “It takes however long it takes,” replies SVT honcho Hermann Salenbauch, who adds, “No machine can do this. If you know of one, I’d be interested.” If you want to save Ford some money, choose the no-credit stripe-delete option (which gets you black stripes on the seats).

So with the introductions out of the way, let’s get this party started on Pacific Coast Highway. This much power corrupts one’s ability to observe speed limits pretty absolutely, so there’s a 12-volt plug up high on the dash within easy reach of any enforcement countermeasures. Torque flows in a linear torrent, but it’s easily metered by the accelerator, and the four-mode AdvanceTrac stability system permits enough wheelspin to allow gentle drifting and pointing the car even when fully engaged. For wilder driving, depress the brake and push the button once to turn traction control off, twice to engage sport, or hold it eight seconds to disable it. Linear controls make Jackie Stewart-smooth driving easy with no stability intervention on tight, technical, twisty roads, though bumpy corners still fluster that live axle. Turn the wheel and the whole car rotates eagerly without any sense of swinging the nose toward an apex. The heft and effort seem appropriate, but with all that weight burdening those wide front tires, little information about what’s happening down at the pavement reaches the steering-wheel rim. Body motions are more tightly controlled than in the old GT500, but the ride is far suppler than the coal-cart KR’s.

Of course that live axle really shines at the dragstrip, where Ford recommends leaving AdvanceTrac on, for launch-control assistance managing traction after clutch engagement. We found it allowed way too much wheelspin. Dial up 1800 rpm or so, feather the clutch to let the wheels hook up somewhere halfway up the tach, then hoof it to 6250 rpm (pay no attention to the 6000-rev redline-peak power’s at 6200 and fuel shutoff is at 6250). Get it right and Ford says you’ll see 60 mph in 4.3 sec and hit the quarter in 12.3 at 118 mph. We tested the GT500 twice and weather conspired against us both times. In Dearborn, Michigan, 43-degree temps compromised launch grip, and in Sonoma, California, a flag-straightening headwind blew down our times (the geography at Infineon dragway precludes two-way average running). Our best run scrambled to 60 in 4.7 sec and through the quarter mile in 12.7 at 118.1 mph. That trap speed is dead-on the KR’s and lends credence to Ford’s performance claims. On warm California tarmac, the GT500 generated 0.96g lateral grip and stopped in 109 ft from 60 mph and in 300 from 100 mph. In Michigan, we circled the figure eight in 25.1 sec at 0.81 g.

Better launches in a Challenger SRT8 and Camaro SS match or better our 0-to-60 times, but the Shelby’s a second or more ahead by 100 mph and 7-10 mph faster in the quarter mile. It’s also grippier and quicker around the figure eight and pretty satisfying on real-world roads. So until and unless Chevy crashes this party with an LSA-powered Z/28 or Fiat shoves a Ferrari 12 into the Challenger, it looks like Shelby’s GT500 has earned its crown as king of the pony/musclecar hill fair-‘n’-square.

Horsepower

2010 Ford Shelby GT500 News and Reviews

When it comes to braking distances, you might think that the lighter the car, the better. However, when you have a lot of power under the hood, it's not that easy to come to a quick stop. We scoured through our database of every make and model to bring you the 20 vehicles we've tested with the shortest braking distances.…

In theory, you could settle for one of those 2011 Ford Mustangs with the new 3.7-liter V-6. Or the 5.0-liter V-8-powered GT. Or maybe even the supercharged, 550-horsepower Shelby GT500. But for the driver who really dislikes tires, Shelby has teamed with engine builder Nelson Racing Engines to craft a 1200-horsepower Shelby GT500 called "Code Red," and they're reportedly looking…

Texas-size braggadocio started this retro-car rumble. Back in January, famed Houston-area tuner John Hennessey released plans for a 705-horsepower, ZR1-engined 2010 Camaro. Naturally, this sent forum boards buzzing about when and how Ford would respond with its 2010 Mustang.Not two weeks later, a white-hot press release out of Las Vegas landed in our inbox, detailing Shelby's plan for a 725-horsepower…